Re: Both cases illustrate that APIs are subject to copyright
The licence applied because Microsoft signed a contractual agreement with Sun.
Microsoft broke that contractual agreement and lost the case.
Google discussed licensing with Sun (prior to their acquisition by Oracle) but instead choose to implement a "clean room" version - we can argue about whether it was a clean room implementation, but as there is no contractual agreement, Oracle couldn't treat this as a contractual issue (that they would have likely won based on the existing MS vs Sun case).
Pretending the Sun vs Microsoft case is about API's or protections for copyright shows a complete misunderstanding of that case. It was simple contractual law which is why Microsoft could only delay the outcome, not affect the result.
If your analogy doesn't fit you must acquit...
Not really - just drop the pretence that the outcome of MS vs Sun correlates to the outcome of Google vs Oracle or gives some insight into how the law views API's.